Little Tokyo Service Center
Legal name: Ltsc Community Development Corporation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 954444102
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Los Angeles, CA, USA
- Phone
- 213-473-3030
- Rating
- 76
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Housing Development, Construction, Management
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $27,521,241
- Expenses
- $18,939,588
- Assets
- $187,942,341
- Liabilities
- $128,683,603
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
31 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- CLAIRE KITAYAMA (PRESIDENT)
- MIGUEL NUNEZ (VICE PRESIDENT)
- ERICH NAKANO (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- ERICH NAKANO (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $172,127 total reported compensation
- TAKAO SUZUKI (HIGH COMPENSATED EMPLOYEE): $163,110 total reported compensation
- DEBBIE CHEN (HIGH COMPENSATED EMPLOYEE): $132,977 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
LTSC's mission is to serve the community through community revitalization and cultural preservation.
What it reported doing in 2024
Worked with little tokyo residents and stakeholders to improve the community and represent their voices in the ongoing development of the neighborhood; developed and managed a multi-purpose sports and activities center to provide a facility where youth and families can congregate and engage in meaningful activities that emphasize sportsmanship, teamwork, diversity and healthy-living; served as the fiscal sponsor for a number of programs, offering technical assistance, as well as management and administrative support to help the programs fulfill their respective goals and missions.administered subsidized, high quality child care for primarily low-income families with children ages six weeks to five years old. The family child care program involves home-based providers who service newborns and toddlers, and angelina preschool services three to fiveyear-olds. The programs are developmental, child-oriented, service program costs of other, non-childcare, related programs, parent-friendly and staffed by skilled professionals.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and some filed totals do not add up.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 70
- Transparency & Controls: 62
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 78
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 60.1%; rating input score 60
- Program expense ratio: 87.3%; rating input score 87
- Fundraising efficiency: $31.64 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Missing
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 31.2%; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 9.92; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.68; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 3.9%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 8.8% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 7.7% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 14.7% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 6 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 60.1% of revenue deployed · 87.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 26 of 26 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $16.5M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $172K · 31 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $37.7M reported
- Consistency: 31 of 32 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 25 filed related-organization links
- Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
- People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 18/100.